A pharmacy that invoiced GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) for costs involved in acting on facsimile advice to recall medication that was possibly faulty has succeeded in its Court proceedings to recover costs. The Court found that the recall facsimile constituted a contract with an implied term that GSK would give proper and reasonable payment for the actions taken by the pharmacy to recall the medicines. In addition, the Court found that the pharmacy could succeed on a quantum meruit basis (because GSK requested services, freely accepted those services, and obtained a benefit from the provision of the services). The Court commented that "the necessity or desirability of complying with an ethical or moral obligation cannot be a basis for disentitling a claim for compensation" and found that there was "no doubt that the recall was disruptive of [the pharmacy's] normal or usual business". The Court ordered that GSK pay reasonable costs (which were determined by the Court) to the pharmacy, and also pay Court costs. Ian Johnson Pharmacy Ltd v GlaxoSmithKline NZ Ltd (DC Manukau CIV-2010-092-1947, 26 September 2011)